You are on page 1of 3

identify all activities that form part of the project estimate how long (the duration) of each activity

determine the relationship between the various activities; are these tasks dependent on each other Activity B can only start once A is complete independent Activity P can happen at the same time as Q (parallel activities) Next a network is drawn, containing nodes and activity lines. Nodes
EST the earliest start time of the next activity

4
The number assigned to each node is for identification purposes only

17 20

LFT

the latest finish time of the previous activity

Activity Lines
Each activity is usually given a code letter for ease of identification

C 6
The duration of the activity is written under the activity line

Rules for constructing a network o o o o o There can be only one start node and one finish node Activity lines must go from a node to another node; they cannot hang Activity lines should never cross Label everything Once the critical path has been identified, mark it with two short lines through each critical activity line Hints - when drawing a network, do not add an end node on an activity line until you are sure what comes next - a rough draft at a network is always a good idea (you are almost certain to make a mistake somewhere) Earliest Start Times - the earliest possible time that any particular activity can start, assuming that all previous activities are completed on schedule - calculated by taking the EST of the previous activity and then adding the duration of that activity - if two activities lead into the same node, and therefore there are two possible ESTs, take the larger of the two

Hint when filling in ESTs, start at Node 1 (start node) and then work left to right Latest Finish Times - the latest time that an activity can finish without delaying the whole project - calculated by subtracting the duration of the next activity from the LFT of that activity - where two activities come from the same node therefore there are two possible LFTs, take the smaller value of the two values

Apart from looking at the external market (the market analysis, or the OT of the SWOT analysis, the marketing audit also requires the firm to look at the internal aspects of its marketing, its SW). To do this it can use various management tools, for example the

Boston Matrix
As part of the analysis of its product portfolio (the range and mix of the products that a firm currently offers), the business can take a snapshot of its current portfolio in terms of: the rate of growth of the market that each product operates in the market share that the firms product holds High Each product falls into one of four categories, which, in sequence, are: question mark or problem child a new product introduced into a potentially promising market star the product takes off with rapidly rising sales cash cow the market matures and growth slows, but market share is held dog the market declines and sales of the product fall off rapidly M a r k e t S h a r e Low

Cash Cow

Star

Dog

Question Mark

Market Growth

High

Note how the strong cashflow generated by the cash cow can be used to crosssubsidise the problem child through its product launch and early months, thus giving it more chance of success, ie becoming a star. The Boston Matrix thus helps the firm balance its product portfolio so that: it does not become too dependent upon an ageing set of products that may currently generate high cashflows or be profitable now, but might all start losing market share simultaneously at some point in the future. it can identify the dogs and kill them. it does not have to introduce too many new products (problem children) onto the markets at the same time, thus potentially putting enormous strain on the firms cashflow.

Product Life Cycle


Many products are seen to go through a set of predictable stages of life. Each stage will influence the quantity and quality of the marketing support that will be required. These stages can be illustrated graphically;

Democratic leaders

(or participative leaders) encourage input from all employees and decisions are a result of either some kind of voting procedure or, more likely, as an outcome of informal discussions; leaders must therefore be extremely skilled as communicators. can either be seen as lazy and unwilling to take the decisions that are their essential function; alternatively, they are so trusting in the ability of their subordinates that they have delegated the entire decision making process.

Laissez Faire leaders

McGregors Theory X and Theory Y McGregor attempted to formalise leadership theory by looking at two contrasting styles. Each looks at managements attitude towards their workforce and thus defines their behaviour towards them. Theory X - similar in many ways to the negative aspects of Taylorism - employees dislike work and will avoid it if possible; responsibility is also to be avoided as workers have little if any ambition - workers want the security of a quiet life in their jobs

therefore management must exert continuous control and supervision over the workforce. There is a total lack of trust. Theory Y - employees enjoy work, seeing it as an opportunity to fulfil their social, self-esteem and self-actualisation needs - under certain circumstances, workers actually seek responsibility

therefore management should encourage their workers to take on positions of authority by delegating decision-making to them; this will improve their motivation and commitment. However, there is a need for trust. McGregor himself saw Theory Y as the only way forward; Theory X was only set out to be ridiculed and criticised. However, as with many aspects of HR management (organisational structure, motivation, leadership style), the context will determine the best approach. But the management of transition from X to Y will always create problems as trust is not a commodity that can be forced into the workplace, or built overnight. Ouchis Theory Z With the success of Japanese business in the 80s, Ouchi suggested that there was a distinct Japanese style of management that Western firms could adopt to further improve the motivation and therefore productivity of their workforce. It included:

adoption of team working wherever possible, with open communication and a consultative leadership style enhanced job security, on-going appraisal and training, and a concern for the employees welfare both in work and in their social life

This clearly draws on the higher orders of Maslows hierarchy.

You might also like